Digby’s coming out party was certainly the signature moment of the confrence so far for us gals (how wonderful that everyone can now know that the most trenchant and insightful voice in the blogosphere belongs to a woman), but it certainly wasn’t the only interesting one. Over the next few days I’ll be digesting and discussing much about the failure of female House candidates to win elections in 2007 and the role (or lack thereof) that the Democratic establishment/interest groups played in those races. There is a very big vacuum here that the blogosphere I think can effectively step into. We’ll also be focusing on the very exciting things that WVWV is doing to engage single women in the electoral process.

Hillary Clinton’s speech from this morning is already causing a significant flap. Byron York sat through the same speech as the rest of us but was viewing it through his typical lens of such partisan distortion that his perceptions once again appear to be the product of bizarroworld. Hillary was in no way booed for saying “the American military has done its job,” the boos came when she claimed that the Iraqi government was somehow to blame. Right wing mythology regularly demands that one believe their recklessly constructed fantasies over your own eyes and ears, but for those who still ascribe to some sort of consensus reality you can view the YouTube above. Fox News and Drudge are already running with bold-faced lie (which Bob Geiger deconstructs second-by-second here). The only thing that exceeds the audacity of their lies is the speed at which they propagate them.

Those who want to maintain that Hillary is cold and doesn’t connect with an audience clearly haven’t heard her speak recently because she was anything but. She was actually very winning and warm and people really liked her. She was introduced by Emily’s List’s Ellen Meagher, and initially won the audience over in that Mark Penn/Soccer Mom kind of way that no doubt works well for her (though attempts to push other female candidates into such a mold when it just won’t work might explain some of the 2007 House defeats). She came prepared for the “boos” and when she initially got them she was very impressive in not losing her composure and acknowledging their presence without getting distracted or put off her game.

I don’t think she was prepared for the booing that greeted her “blame the Iraqis” talking point (which has evidently been a feature of her stump speech for quite a while). That she did not realize it was going to be the response she would get from a progressive audience was kind of surprising, but I think she’s probably repeated it as a kind of middle-of-the road, “support the troops” pseudo-centrist palliative so many times that nobody in her retinue anticipated that this was an audience who knew what a lame position it was and would respond accordingly.

I assume the Democrats have focus grouped this line and find that it appeals on some level — and I think you can all imagine what level that might be. (It could be argued that it’s a tactic to force the Iraqi government to make some moves before the election if they feel that the Democrats are going to be harder on them…) But the fact is that horrible cock-up in Iraq is the result of a foolish and cynical US invasion invasion of Iraq and a complete lack of any intelligent planning for the aftermath. To blame the Iraqi government for the intractable sectarian differences that most respectable experts and historians predicted would make this deluded neocon project a failure is pretty cheap.

It’s pretty shocking that the people who voted to go into Iraq, pound it into the ground and destroy what scarce infrastructure it already had can then turn around and pretend to be “reasonable” when they blame the Iraqi government for not being able to rise above the sectarian violence and civil war even a monkey could have figured out the occupation would trigger and provide strong governance that would solve all the problems their poor judgment created in the first ploace. It really is the ultimate “blame your victim” cop-out.

It may fall under the category of “But other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play,” but as a sidenote it was interesting to me that when Hillary got booed she actually managed to use it to kick up the energy level of her speech and bring the room along with her. It was not something that many speakers could have pulled off and by the end of it, despite the negative response to her Iraq comments, the crowd was with her.

I think it was Duncan who said that people who underestimate Hillary do so at their own peril. I concur.

Byron York sat through the same speech as the rest of us but was viewing it through his typical lens of such partisan distortion that his perceptions once again appear to be the product of bizarroworld.

In cinema studies, there’s the “male gaze”.
In this case, it’s the “neocon gaze.”

Very interesting post, Jane. I actually watched the entire speech on the TBA website, and was impressed with her speaking ability, which has certainly improved. All in all, I thought it was a good stump speech–hitting most of the right notes.

And I thought the bit about the booing was overblown, watching the video, it was hard to tell that it was *all* booing. I also noticed that it appeared as though she got a standing ovation afterwards…

If this is the Hillary that most people are going to see, then I agree that she will be a very formidable candidate. If she wins the nomination, I will fight for her, since she is leaps and bounds better than any of the rethugs out there (though I am still hoping and praying that Gore gets into the race). I am also clear that I would much prefer her to Obama…

Byron York better quit using all that hair dye…it is really messin with what few synapses that inhabit his peaa brain…..
They don’t get that only 28% of the country still believe his and Rovers bullcrap talking points……Not enough to win elections Byron!

I wish I could get my head around Hillary, but shes still pro-war and I really dont think our country needs any more dynasty

It is worth mentioning that she noted in her speech that she and Sen Byrd are sponsoring a bill to de-authorize the war, which means that Bush would not have the legal authority to wage it. That to me is a better option than simply cutting off funding. More honest.

Byron York sat through the same speech as the rest of us but was viewing it through his typical lens of such partisan distortion that his perceptions once again appear to be the product of bizarroworld.

Reality and facts have never been an important component for the Byron York types. After all, why should facts and reality stand in the way of a good big lie and smear? What’s the fun in that?

Actually, we didn’t have to worry about her when the list of 31 names was released last weekend since she wasn’t on it. the three names to go to the governor had to come from the list of 31 who submitted their names for consideration.

“I think it was Duncan who said that people who underestimate Hillary do so at their own peril. I concur.”

I have watched the Clinton’s political careers since 1981 and underestimation is a recurring theme. They can both take huge amounts of abuse and come back swinging. Hillary has taken shit since the day she arrived in Arkansas: her hair, her glasses, her name, etc.

Thank you, Jane. And, Digby, whom I want to be when I grow up. For those who are open-minded about Senator Clinton, I recommend “The Case for Hillary Clinton” by Susan Estrich. Susan explores what it would mean for women should we have a President Hillary Clinton, something I hadn’t thought much about. My main thought has been it would be good for the entire country if we had a female president. Men just don’t get it.

I have absolutely no problem discerning where fault lies for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. It’s not the American soldiers and not the Iraqi government who are to blame. When any presidential candidate attempts the scapegoat method with the Iraq catastrophe, that is fair game. One does not have to be particularly brilliant in assigning responsibility for the Iraq mess. This transparent attempt to escape blame is plain stupid.

Thank you, Jane. And, Digby, whom I want to be when I grow up. For those who are open-minded about Senator Clinton, I recommend “The Case for Hillary Clinton” by Susan Estrich. Susan explores what it would mean for women should we have a President Hillary Clinton, something I hadn’t thought much about. My main thought has been it would be good for the entire country if we had a female president. Men just don’t get it.

I am ambivalent about Hillary for a number of reasons, but I have to say that I have found myself feeling an embarrassingly tingly feeling lately when I watch her speak. She does come across as presidential, and as a woman, it would be a fabulous feeling to see a woman hold that office. Better yet, a woman as smart as Hillary is.

A big part of me wants to believe that there is hope for her. As it would be just awful if she got there and blew it.

When Ford was turning out junk cars in the late 70s and early 80s it would have been madness for the CEO of Ford to stand over a Fairmont or a Granada and say “Bad car! Why don’t you just run better?”. It doesn’t run well because it wasn’t built well – it’s not the car’s fault.

Similarly the Iraqi government was designed and built from US plans, using US timelines for how the elections would occur, the US determined when the elections would occur, built the Iraqi court system, helped write the Iraqi constitution, all under US military occupation. For the US to now stand over the Iraqi government and say “Bad car! Why don’t you run better?” is the exact same kind of madness that infected supporters of the war in the first place.

I don’t question Hillary’s capacity to govern, and I couldn’t care less about her gender. Everything else being equal, I’d prefer a lady president – that’d be a big slap to the male patriarchy. That’s right – some of us Southern, straight, middle-aged white guys don’t like a bunch of legacy, locker-room, towel-snappers running the country either!

I don’t care for her economic policies – she’s way too close to moneyed interests. I’m really hoping Edwards can draw to an inside straight in Iowa, NH and SC. That’s where my time and money is going.

But being a pragmatist, I have to accept the possibility Hillary prevails (don’t shoot me, OK kid!).

If so, how do we pull her to the progressive side of the ledger? Gonna take some stick with the carrot, IMV.

was Digby’s gender a secret before? I also knew she was a woman…..not sure how, but I did.

I did too. I think that if you read her closely enough, you would have to know she was a woman. Or maybe you would have to be a woman to see it. One clue was the way she ridicules boys-playing-at-being-men. Another was the way in which she writes about abortion. I am sure there are others, but I can’t think of them right now.

Digby is so awesome. My favorite thing is when she said she blogs pseudonymously. Not anonymously, like the concern trolls and anti-blogger punditocracy claims (even today Richard Cohen took a cheap shot about responding to “someone without a name”).

Mark Twain wasn’t anonymous, nor was Lewis Carroll. They were fake names, but definite personalities that could be criticized and held accountable. Anyone who was schooled in America before NCLB should know about Ben Franklin writing as Poor Richard and a bevy of other noms de plume.

I have had enough of stubborn, pig-headed presidents. One thing which I really respect Edwards, among others for, is admitting they made a mistake in voting with Bush to invade Iraq. I don’t care much for a flip-flopper, but there is distinction between this, and changing one’s mind based on facts, evidence and principle.

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: June 20, 2007
Filed at 2:31 p.m. ET

The following recall has been announced:

– Gills Onions, LLC is recalling diced yellow onions, because they could be contaminated by Listeria monocytogenes. Listeria is a microorganism that can cause serious or fatal infections in children, the elderly or those with weakened immune systems. It can also cause miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant women. Healthy adults can experience symptoms including fevers, severe headaches, nausea and diarrhea.

The onions were sold to consumers in 10-ounce bags labeled with the Trader Joe’s brand name in Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon and Washington. The onions were also sold to food service companies in 20-pound cartons labeled as Gills Onions Brand and Sysco Natural Brand. All the packages are printed with a best-if-used-by date of ”06/16/07” and a lot number ”2017-R.” Details: by phone at 800-348-2255 or 209-669-9625.

I have a n00b request/inquiry only tangentially on topic: as a relative latecomer to the progressive blogosphere, where can I go to find a compendium of blogger and blog biographies/histories/chronologies?

If that’s not something that has been done, is there anyone (Progressive Historians, perchance) who would take it on as a public service project?

Since July 25, 1990, when April Glaspie was instructed by Sec. of State James Baker to tell Saddam“We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America,” we have destroyed Iraq, killing close to 2 million of them, maining even more, and displacing what is now approaching 3 million of them. Iraqi women, once the best educated in the Middle East outside of Israel, are now demeaned beyond recognition. Clinton’s husband bears no small share of the guilt in this and in other continuing downward spirals in the Middle East.

Hillary Clinton is a heartless, cruel, sinister person to have said what she did yesterday, and I’m ashamed the booing was so sporadic and muffled. And I’m ashamed she’s being defended so assiduously here and elsewhere in the left blogosphere today.

I don’t question Hillary’s capacity to govern, and I couldn’t care less about her gender. Everything else being equal, I’d prefer a lady president – that’d be a big slap to the male patriarchy. That’s right – some of us Southern, straight, middle-aged white guys don’t like a bunch of legacy, locker-room, towel-snappers running the country either!

I don’t care for her economic policies – she’s way too close to moneyed interests. I’m really hoping Edwards can draw to an inside straight in Iowa, NH and SC. That’s where my time and money is going.

But being a pragmatist, I have to accept the possibility Hillary prevails (don’t shoot me, OK kid!).

If so, how do we pull her to the progressive side of the ledger? Gonna take some stick with the carrot, IMV.

I will not vote for Clinton in the primaries. I will support the nominee of my party.

I have felt this for awhile also, but I have modified my position to “it depends on who is still viable when the primaries get to my state (NY)” If it is a neck and neck Obama-Hillary race with Edwards running a distant 3rd, I will vote for Hillary. If there is any chance of Edwards winning a substantial number of delegates, he gets my vote, hands down. Then there is the Gore possibility–which is frankly, my favorite!

I have had enough of stubborn, pig-headed presidents. One thing which I really respect Edwards, among others for, is admitting they made a mistake in voting with Bush to invade Iraq. I don’t care much for a flip-flopper, but there is distinction between this, and changing one’s mind based on facts, evidence and principle.

At least he did it before it became so popular to criticize the war. He flat out said he was wrong.

I could not support him in 2003 because of his vote, so that meant a lot to me and allowed me to give him a pass.

IMO, The first step towards correcting a mistake is to admit you made a mistake. And Hillary just won’t do that, it seems. On top of that, she blames the victim. I don’t go for that stuff.

And, I’m sorry if I sound incredibly rigid, but this was a pretty huge-ass mistake, as I think we all know.

Hillary doesn’t make right choices. Yes, she’s articulate and well-prepared but doesn’t use the God-given gift that women possess and that is her intuition. Intuition would have told her that the invasion of Iraq was wrong. Get out of the intellectual box trap!

When Hillary goes after the Iraqi government for not doing their part to bring about peace, she does sort of have a valid point in my opinion. Consider the El Salvador option that seems to have taken hold in Iraq following Negroponte’s stint as Ambassador to Iraq. The Maliki government has not reined in militia activities by their Dept. of Interior. The Iraqi government cavalierly was going to take a vacation for 2 months right in the middle of this civil war, and on and on. It is not the “fault” of the Iraqi people, but there does lie some responsibility in their government’s behavior. Iraqi troops don’t show up to their assignments. I understand fully why they feel that way – we have destroyed their country, but the fact is, the U.S., though responsible for the situation in the first place, cannot fix it. Substantial participation of the Iraqi citizens and government will be the only way for that country to have a chance at survival. They won’t do it, as long as we are there, and they might not do it if we leave either, but leaving is the only way to find out. Also, Hillary is well aware of the difficulties of actually physically getting the troops out. I commend her on that.

I’d like to throw out there, to keep things in balance, that some of the guys on stage with Digby were atrociously dressed. It was quite distracting. If you’re going to put on a suit coat it should sort of match the clothes you’re wearing.

(This meaningless moment is brought in a sense of showing it’s not always women who get criticized for appearance.)

Okay, I have ambivalent feelings about some issues regarding Hillary but I have to say that I had misgivings about Bill. So, I am willing to give her a chance. Here’s what I would like to see as a test flight for the big election. Let’s give her feedback. Write her, let her know what you like and what you don’t. Let’s see how responsive her campaign is. Instead of bashing, (I am speaking to women since we sometimes have a little problem with supporting each other in leadership positions), let’s try communicating with her about what we would want her to do to get our votes. Let’s get behind her and ask for what we want and see how she responds?

Well, that’s what I am going to do. I have to say that the idea of a female president so that I can tell my daughter, “yes, you can be president..” and not say it with a slight twinge of doubt, is a refreshing thought. I think that if she keeps looking like the front runner, I need to start taking my concerns to her privately and to move toward a more supportive position. This may be a once in a lifetime chance for me to support a woman. I hope not, but I think with Bill as the side kick it’s the best chance we have.

I have been overwhelmed with the amount of sexism coming from commentators on every channel and even including my beloved Olbermann.

Women, we may need to stand together on this one. And no, don’t look the other way, ask her for what you want.

not to toot my own horn, but I’m really amazed at how close Digby came to the picture in my minds-eye. I always knew she was a woman, but thinking back on it I’m not sure why – maybe some sort of self-reference to women’s issues perhaps during one of the RGJ rants.

I guess the Iraqi’s are as much to blame for their mess just like the folks from New Orleans are to blame for the loss of their infrastructure. Gotta change that one, Hillary. I’ll vote for you if I have to.

I assume the Democrats have focus grouped this line and find that it appeals on some level — and I think you can all imagine what level that might be.

and add the line which Hillary was really booed for in her speech…

Perpetuating a lie through focus groups and speeches is just inexcusable in my book. And the speech above sounds like she is telling everyone it will be at least into the next presidency before the occupation draws down..

Not good enough, not at all.

The American people need the truth and the need someone who will fight everyday to end this nightmare.

1. As stated, I will not vote for ole G&S Hillary under any circumstances. If Bloomberg runs, I’ll give him serious consideration. I’ll have to look into Bloomberg further.

2. While those revel in Gutless & Spineless Hillary, I won’t forget a simple moment when Matthews just asked her if she favors/opposes a pardon for Traitor Libby. Ole G&S demurred and played female coy. Ole G&S refused to answer a simple question. Gutless and Spineless, once again.

My main thought has been it would be good for the entire country if we had a female president. Men just don’t get it.

You’re right, I don’t get it.

She voted for this invasion and occupation of a country that posed no threat to us, and defends it to this day. I don’t care about “intelligence” reports at the time, since MILLIONS of us around the globe were taking to the streets shouting about how stupid this is!

She’s a friend of Rupert Murdoch, one of the most destructive forces to our Constitution in history. Rupert recently held a fundraiser for her. I guess if you’re rich enough and willing to give her some cash-eesh, you can hang with Hillary. With friends like these….

Lots of sabre-rattling about Iran from Hillary also. Sure, would mean alot to the women of America. The women of Iran? Not so much as the bombs begin falling.

With three daughters of my own, I can understand what you’re saying about having a woman as Prez. The problem is, Hillary is not the role model they need. I would be behind Nancy Pelosi 100%. I don’t want my daughters growing up an oligarchy. The US Constitution is one of the greatest documents ever, and I want those ideals to rule our country in the future. I fear a future where Conglomerates have even more control than they currently do. I fear Hillary will not only allow this, she will encourage mega-corporate rule.

This is also part of the blurring strategy. As long as she can make it difficult to separate out the different candidate’s views on Iraq, she can retain her front running status. For any of the other candidates to have a chance, they have to differentiate themselves from her. Edwards is trying, but it doesn’t seem to be gaining traction. Obama seems incapable of this.

Dodd keeps saying the right things. I wish he’d get more penetration because it would force some of these issues to be debated.

When Hillary goes after the Iraqi government for not doing their part to bring about peace, she does sort of have a valid point in my opinion. Consider the El Salvador option that seems to have taken hold in Iraq following Negroponte’s stint as Ambassador to Iraq. The Maliki government has not reined in militia activities by their Dept. of Interior. The Iraqi government cavalierly was going to take a vacation for 2 months right in the middle of this civil war, and on and on. It is not the “fault” of the Iraqi people, but there does lie some responsibility in their government’s behavior. Iraqi troops don’t show up to their assignments. I understand fully why they feel that way – we have destroyed their country, but the fact is, the U.S., though responsible for the situation in the first place, cannot fix it. Substantial participation of the Iraqi citizens and government will be the only way for that country to have a chance at survival. They won’t do it, as long as we are there, and they might not do it if we leave either, but leaving is the only way to find out. Also, Hillary is well aware of the difficulties of actually physically getting the troops out. I commend her on that.

We wouldn’t even be having this discussion if Dems like her had not enabled this administration to start this filthy war.

Again, the first step towards correcting a mistake is to admit you made one.

That’s just my personal opinion. I just don’t like to hear all this pseudo tough talk. I know it’s done for political reasons, but it turns me off big time.

That said, I do respect Hillary a lot for her intelligence, experience and toughness.

I want us out, now. I want those who fabricated the war and the intelligence leading up to the war in the first place to be held fully accountable, removed from power, and prosecuted to the full extent of the war.

oh BTW, Digby was fantastic! Man, if we could ever get some sort of Internet radio/video show with Jane, Digby, Christy, and friends. Now that’s what I’d encourage my daughters to watch. Not some mealy-mouthed Clinton speech.

This is also part of the blurring strategy. As long as she can make it difficult to separate out the different candidate’s views on Iraq, she can retain her front running status. For any of the other candidates to have a chance, they have to differentiate themselves from her. Edwards is trying, but it doesn’t seem to be gaining traction. Obama seems incapable of this.

Dodd keeps saying the right things. I wish he’d get more penetration because it would force some of these issues to be debated.

I want us out, now. I want those who fabricated the war and the intelligence leading up to the war in the first place to be held fully accountable, removed from power, and prosecuted to the full extent of the war.

While the DLC wing of the Democrats are not neoconservatives, they are neoliberals and that’s the same thing without all bombs. Yes, Hillary would make sure that the middle class got some sliver of the pie, and stop the kicking of poor people, but the biggest piece of the pie would still go to the elites. She may believe in human rights, but it’s my feeling money still comes first.

When Hillary goes after the Iraqi government for not doing their part to bring about peace, she does sort of have a valid point in my opinion.

[Mod: snip]

We wouldn’t even be having this discussion if Dems like her had not enabled this administration to start this filthy war.

I respect her for those things too, but I don’t like her. I think the criticisms about her Establishment Dem roots, questionable friends, and scripted and focused group out the wazoo campaign style are all quite valid.

I’m with OKk — I want someone who will get us out of the multiple messes we are in — or at least START on it — and I don’t care if it’s a man or woman.

This is also part of the blurring strategy. As long as she can make it difficult to separate out the different candidate’s views on Iraq, she can retain her front running status. For any of the other candidates to have a chance, they have to differentiate themselves from her. Edwards is trying, but it doesn’t seem to be gaining traction. Obama seems incapable of this.

Dodd keeps saying the right things. I wish he’d get more penetration because it would force some of these issues to be debated.

Here’s some Edwards traction. New Gallup matchup poll: all three Dem front-runners beat all three GOP front-runners, but John beats them all best. He particularly — and strikingly — does best against Romney.

The national polling within parties reflects name recognition and is meaningless since there’s no national primary. Within our party, the five states that matter are Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and perhaps Florida. These (currently) precede Terrible Tuesday, the national primary on 2/5/08.

While the DLC wing of the Democrats are not neoconservatives, they are neoliberals and that’s the same thing without all bombs. Yes, Hillary would make sure that the middle class got some sliver of the pie, and stop the kicking of poor people, but the biggest piece of the pie would still go to the elites. She may believe in human rights, but it’s my feeling money still comes first.

If elected, I hope she proves me wrong but I’m not optimistic.

The Clintons have never struck me as money mongers. They have worked their butts off 24/7/365 for years and years for the country without grandiose exhibitions of luxury. JMHO.

oh BTW, Digby was fantastic! Man, if we could ever get some sort of Internet radio/video show with Jane, Digby, Christy, and friends. Now that’s what I’d encourage my daughters to watch. Not some mealy-mouthed Clinton speech.

I think the women of the progressive blogosphere are exactly the kind of role model young women need. Smart, witty, well-read, independent thinkers, with a healthy appetite for the truth and exposing dangerous lies for the betterment of mankind, and not solely for the purpose of advancing themselves.

as a gyno-challenged American (aka, a man) I am deeply offended by the charade that Digby has perpetrated… men are not “things” to be secretly imitated… why did the Boston Tea Party participants pass themselves off as Indians? because if there were any witnesses Indians would take the blame… who does someone blame when they get mad at Digby? MEN!

This is also from the AwOp. I am not sure what I think about Dionne. But the Presidential campaign really does not begin until the first primary, 6 months away. Plenty of time to focus on the creatures of the darknesss, like Cohen.
——————————-http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01367.html
As a result, a large divide has opened up between attitudes toward the Democratic Party in general and Congress in particular. An NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll taken June 8-11 found that 42 percent of voters had a positive view of the Democratic Party and 35 percent a negative view. For Republicans, the numbers were 28 percent positive, 49 percent negative. The old Whigs might do better.

But only 23 percent of Americans approved of Congress’s job performance, down 8 points from April; 64 percent disapproved in this month’s poll.

But it’s striking that while the NBC-Wall Street Journal poll showed the public preferring a Democrat to a Republican for president in 2008 by 52 percent to 31 percent when no specific candidates were listed, public polls have shown much smaller leads — or occasionally, even small deficits — for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama when they were matched individually against Rudy Giuliani or John McCain.

Given how tarnished the Republican brand is, the GOP’s best strategy is to bring Democrats down with them into the murky depths of public disapproval. This might build support for a third-party candidate in 2008 — which could help Republicans win by splitting the anti-Bush, anti-system vote.

I have tremendous respect for the bravery of those who reveal their real names on the interwebs, and just as much for those who keep their pseudonymity. There are real life reasons for both; hurray for Digby for stepping out this week — what a wonderful speech!

Why doesn’t Dan Abrams wake up and put a woman host in Scarborough’s place after Countdown? Someone like Rachel Maddow, with lots of blogofem guests, please.

as a gyno-challenged American (aka, a man) I am deeply offended by the charade that Digby has perpetrated… men are not “things” to be secretly imitated… why did the Boston Tea Party participants pass themselves off as Indians? because if there were any witnesses Indians would take the blame… who does someone blame when they get mad at Digby? MEN!

LOL

I don’t think she ever intentionally presented herself as a man, did she?

Some people might take me to be a man just because my handle is Mandrake (from Dr. Strangelove – Cptn Lionel Mandrake). I just loved the name because I love the movie and I identified with the character (running around trying to prevent the destruction of the world). But I’m not trying to fool anyone that I’m a man.

This is also from the AwOp. I am not sure what I think about Dionne. But the Presidential campaign really does not begin until the first primary, 6 months away. Plenty of time to focus on the creatures of the darknesss, like Cohen.

[Mod: snip]

Lieberman immediately applauded the prospect of Bloomberg’s entry. Take that as confirmation of Dionne’s thesis.

I have tremendous respect for the bravery of those who reveal their real names on the interwebs, and just as much for those who keep their pseudonymity. There are real life reasons for both; hurray for Digby for stepping out this week — what a wonderful speech!

Why doesn’t Dan Abrams wake up and put a woman host in Scarborough’s place after Countdown? Someone like Rachel Maddow, with lots of blogofem guests, please.

I don’t think I agree with her conclusion, but I have experienced the same phenomenon she describes, i.e., I loved them when I was a kid, but they left my daughter (an avid reader) cold.

Dunno, maybe they’re just outdated. Also I never liked Nancy herself all that much — too Miss Perfect for me — I just liked the stories.

I read Nancy in the 60s and was not a huge fan, rather I read them because they were “there” (and I read whatever I could get my hands on, living way out in the middle of nowhere in a no TV house, I was like that). She didn’t resemble any teenager that I knew–particularly the part about her own car. I was more a Pippy Longstockings, Borrowers, Wind in the Willows, Charlotte’s Web type of kid.

as a gyno-challenged American (aka, a man) I am deeply offended by the charade that Digby has perpetrated… men are not “things” to be secretly imitated… why did the Boston Tea Party participants pass themselves off as Indians? because if there were any witnesses Indians would take the blame… who does someone blame when they get mad at Digby? MEN!

LOL

I don’t think she ever intentionally presented herself as a man, did she?

Some people might take me to be a man just because my handle is Mandrake (from Dr. Strangelove – Cptn Lionel Mandrake). I just loved the name because I love the movie and I identified with the character (running around trying to prevent the destruction of the world). But I’m not trying to fool anyone that I’m a man.

Here’s some Edwards traction. New Gallup matchup poll: all three Dem front-runners beat all three GOP front-runners, but John beats them all best. He particularly — and strikingly — does best against Romney.

Wow. That’s encouraging for Edwards, even with the Conglomerate Media out to destroy him.

Just saw a recent Time magazine the other day that had Mittmo Romney on the cover with a title saying something like, “He Sure Looks Like a President…” WTF?!?! You can’t buy that kind of publicity (well, maybe that’s exactly what he’s done…) Judging by all the video clips C&L and others have of TV “journalists” gushing over Mittmo’s looks, we’re in for even worse coverage this election season.

Meanwhile, Edwards gets lambasted by “Legz” Couric, for his haircuts, and his house. Thing is, Mittmo has way more money than Edwards, so why all the focus on Edwards’ expenses? Considering he came from little and worked his way up, and he has spent years working on tangible ways to reduce poverty, I don’t really see much of a problem.

I have tremendous respect for the bravery of those who reveal their real names on the interwebs, and just as much for those who keep their pseudonymity. There are real life reasons for both; hurray for Digby for stepping out this week — what a wonderful speech!

Why doesn’t Dan Abrams wake up and put a woman host in Scarborough’s place after Countdown? Someone like Rachel Maddow, with lots of blogofem guests, please.

I have tremendous respect for the bravery of those who reveal their real names on the interwebs, and just as much for those who keep their pseudonymity. There are real life reasons for both; hurray for Digby for stepping out this week — what a wonderful speech!

Why doesn’t Dan Abrams wake up and put a woman host in Scarborough’s place after Countdown? Someone like Rachel Maddow, with lots of blogofem guests, please.

I always enjoy Maddow’s take on things. Smart person.

I LOVE her! She is sharp as a tack, informative, witty as hell, utterly charming, and cute as button. She’d be great!

Associated Press’ Clever New Coinage: “Slick Hillary”
By Greg Sargent
We’re certainly not the first to observe that the downside of the Hillary candidacy is that it gives the media a chance to relive the nineties all over again.

But we think we’ve found the most perfect classic of this genre to date. It’s a piece by the Associated Press’ Ron Fournier, who dreams up a Godawful clever new coinage:

Sen. Hillary Clinton An Artful Dodger

WASHINGTON — Slick Hillary? Former President Clinton earned the nickname “Slick Willy” for his mastery in the political arts of ducking and dodging. He had a knack for convincing people on both sides of an issue that he agreed with them.

bonkers — Edwards’ problem is that, to the elites, he is a class traitor. Having clawed their own way up (like Russert) they are ashamed to see how much Edwards has done for those less fortunate. Afraid they’ll be mocked for their own salaries and mansions on Martha’s Vineyard, they join in the right’s fingerpointing at the Edwards’ house, haircut, and hedgefund employment.

“I think it was Duncan who said that people who underestimate Hillary do so at their own peril. I concur.”

I have watched the Clinton’s political careers since 1981 and underestimation is a recurring theme. They can both take huge amounts of abuse and come back swinging. Hillary has taken shit since the day she arrived in Arkansas: her hair, her glasses, her name, etc.

I don’t think anyone underestimates HRC. I don’t. I think it’s more of what will Obama and Edwards do to separate themselves from her. I suppose they are all waiting for after Labor Day. We shall see.

When Hillary came to NY to run for the Senate, I will admit that my heart sank. But then when it became abundantly clear that she would be able to defeat Rudy (which is why I think he really pulled out of that campaign–which went much like this one, in that he started out “big” and then began to stumble badly as his dirty laundry began to be aired and upstate voters went ewww), I — and and awful lot of other unlikely supporters from both the left and the right got on board and she won big. I think that she is following exactly the same strategy now, and could easily pull it off. She has got to be one of the most disciplined politicians out there. A lot depends on what the rethugs cough up (& I can guarantee that it won’t be Rudy).

bonkers — Edwards’ problem is that, to the elites, he is a class traitor. Having clawed their own way up (like Russert) they are ashamed to see how much Edwards has done for those less fortunate. Afraid they’ll be mocked for their own salaries and mansions on Martha’s Vineyard, they join in the right’s fingerpointing at the Edwards’ house, haircut, and hedgefund employment.

I know. Ain’t it just absurd. Edwards is a self-made man, unlike most of these pampered putzes.

OBAMA AND EDWARDS. Edwards said better things, Obama said things better. That’s my summary of their two speeches. Both have matured as candidates — and considerably so. Obama gave the best speech I’ve seen him give — and I was at the 2004 Democratic convention.

I LOVE her! She is sharp as a tack, informative, witty as hell, utterly charming, and cute as button. She’d be great!

It’s because Abrams doesn’t talk to “real” people. Do you really think he reads all the email that is sent to him? Until the media gets out of their Beltway type group think, nothing will change. Conservatives and neo-cons good. Those DFH’s, bad.

bonkers — Edwards’ problem is that, to the elites, he is a class traitor. Having clawed their own way up (like Russert) they are ashamed to see how much Edwards has done for those less fortunate. Afraid they’ll be mocked for their own salaries and mansions on Martha’s Vineyard, they join in the right’s fingerpointing at the Edwards’ house, haircut, and hedgefund employment.

Good point. I wonder if the media “elite” also have trouble with someone like Edwards because he doesn’t fit the “liberals hate capitalism” theme they’ve spent years propagating. He’s working for a hedgefund, making even more money, yet he’s still trying to help out the “little people.” Does not compute in their little pea brains…

I think everyone in the country–even rethugs–are allergic to anything named Bush. And Jeb and Daddy know it, which is why Daddy cried not so long ago, and no one is even whispering about a Jeb candidacy.

I’ve been cottoning to the idea of Gore/Edwards in light of the honest to God fact and irony that both were robbed of election by Bush/Cheney operatives rigging the vote in Ohio, Florida and heaven only knows what other states.

bonkers — Edwards’ problem is that, to the elites, he is a class traitor. Having clawed their own way up (like Russert) they are ashamed to see how much Edwards has done for those less fortunate. Afraid they’ll be mocked for their own salaries and mansions on Martha’s Vineyard, they join in the right’s fingerpointing at the Edwards’ house, haircut, and hedgefund employment.

Teddy, I see that pendulum swinging back toward the “elites” and near-elites desiring a way to give back. Not only are the nineties and their shame in recent memory, but the Bush disaster is something they could have and should have worked harder to prevent. Many of them knew better and it’s time for them to step up.

bonkers — Edwards’ problem is that, to the elites, he is a class traitor. Having clawed their own way up (like Russert) they are ashamed to see how much Edwards has done for those less fortunate. Afraid they’ll be mocked for their own salaries and mansions on Martha’s Vineyard, they join in the right’s fingerpointing at the Edwards’ house, haircut, and hedgefund employment.

Good point. I wonder if the media “elite” also have trouble with someone like Edwards because he doesn’t fit the “liberals hate capitalism” theme they’ve spent years propagating. He’s working for a hedgefund, making even more money, yet he’s still trying to help out the “little people.” Does not compute in their little pea brains…

there’s also the fact that he’s a plaintiff’s trial lawyer. Eeeeeeeeew.

I think everyone in the country–even rethugs–are allergic to anything named Bush. And Jeb and Daddy know it, which is why Daddy cried not so long ago, and no one is even whispering about a Jeb candidacy.

But you have to remember those 28%’ers. They’d eat it up and they are the ones that vote in the primary.

To put the contrast another way, where Obama promised to radically change our politics, Edwards promised to radically change our policies. Those were the choices offered to the conference this morning, and they were good ones.

I think everyone in the country–even rethugs–are allergic to anything named Bush. And Jeb and Daddy know it, which is why Daddy cried not so long ago, and no one is even whispering about a Jeb candidacy.

But you have to remember those 28%’ers. They’d eat it up and they are the ones that vote in the primary.

Gotta remember that neither Daddy nor Jeb are “religious” enough for those types. GW is a Bush anomaly. The 28%’ers never trusted Daddy much. Unlike his big brother, Jeb doesn’t play stooopid, nor does he have a fake southern accent.

Good point. I wonder if the media “elite” also have trouble with someone like Edwards because he doesn’t fit the “liberals hate capitalism” theme they’ve spent years propagating. He’s working for a hedgefund, making even more money, yet he’s still trying to help out the “little people.” Does not compute in their little pea brains…

there’s also the fact that he’s a plaintiff’s trial lawyer. Eeeeeeeeew.

Edwards would have been Bork’s first choice for his lawsuit, but for that party affiliation thing.

Here’s some Edwards traction. New Gallup matchup poll: all three Dem front-runners beat all three GOP front-runners, but John beats them all best. He particularly — and strikingly — does best against Romney.

Wow. That’s encouraging for Edwards, even with the Conglomerate Media out to destroy him.

Just saw a recent Time magazine the other day that had Mittmo Romney on the cover with a title saying something like, “He Sure Looks Like a President…” WTF?!?! You can’t buy that kind of publicity (well, maybe that’s exactly what he’s done…) Judging by all the video clips C&L and others have of TV “journalists” gushing over Mittmo’s looks, we’re in for even worse coverage this election season.

Meanwhile, Edwards gets lambasted by “Legz” Couric, for his haircuts, and his house. Thing is, Mittmo has way more money than Edwards, so why all the focus on Edwards’ expenses? Considering he came from little and worked his way up, and he has spent years working on tangible ways to reduce poverty, I don’t really see much of a problem.

Edwards makes no apologies for his wealth–he wants everyone else to have the same opportunities he had in life. Works for me.

But you have to remember those 28%’ers. They’d eat it up and they are the ones that vote in the primary.

Gotta remember that neither Daddy nor Jeb are “religious” enough for those types. GW is a Bush anomaly. The 28%’ers never trusted Daddy much. Unlike his big brother, Jeb doesn’t play stooopid, nor does he have a fake southern accent.

Gotta remember that neither Daddy nor Jeb are “religious” enough for those types. GW is a Bush anomaly. The 28%’ers never trusted Daddy much. Unlike his big brother, Jeb doesn’t play stooopid, nor does he have a fake southern accent.

Jeb crossed over to the Catholic side when he got married

Yes, that too. Though I do think they are grooming Jeb Jr for the next generation–didn’t he recently enroll in the military? Figuring he’d be ready to put out in about 8-10 years. That is if he doesn’t get into anymore trouble…

I have read that he was actually the heir anointed by Pops and Bargoyle — y’know, cuz he did well in school and wasn’t a drunk or a coke-head, that kind of thing — but he blew it by losing the first time he ran for gov in FL. Or something like that.

Yes, that too. Though I do think they are grooming Jeb Jr for the next generation–didn’t he recently enroll in the military? Figuring he’d be ready to put out in about 8-10 years. That is if he doesn’t get into anymore trouble…

I have read that he was actually the heir anointed by Pops and Bargoyle — y’know, cuz he did well in school and wasn’t a drunk or a coke-head, that kind of thing — but he blew it by losing the first time he ran for gov in FL. Or something like that.

Yes, that too. Though I do think they are grooming Jeb Jr for the next generation–didn’t he recently enroll in the military? Figuring he’d be ready to put out in about 8-10 years. That is if he doesn’t get into anymore trouble…

Tim @ 20,
I don’t know, but I don’t think so. If she’s feeling really strongly about something it seems to do that.
Strong emotions sometimes make dulcet tones hard to achieve, at least my teenager would tell you that’s true of me.

Chris Cillizza had a really good discussion, with some experts, of the value of national polls. I recommend little that Chris writes, and his appearances on Countdown are too CW by half, but this was a good exposition of the issue, I thought.

Watch cable television for an hour and you’re likely to hear some pundit utter the following phrase: “National polls don’t matter.” The pundit will usually go on to note that the presidential nominating process is a state-by-state affair, not a national contest.

For as long as we can remember the pundits have been right. National polls have served as interesting conversation catalysts, with little empirical value beyond proving who has the highest name identification. Surveys done in traditional early nominating states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, on the other hand, have been considered true indicators of candidate strength.

Everyone is making the case that 2008 is more national due to 2/5/08, but I’m not sure. Split decisions in pre-2/5 states, followed by big splits on 2/5 might lead to even more campaigning rather than two nominees on 2/6.

It could go either way, and I think the punditocracy is reluctant to promulgate the “extended beyond February” campaign. That longer campaign is too self-serving for them to wish for — more cablenews appearances, more traveling, more of them talking on our teevees. But realistically, given the shape of the race (now) it could happen.

Remember, he’s an actor. He could be “acting” as a red herring for Jeb. Look for small introductions of Jeb into the public conscience to test the waters soon. Jeb was at…. Jeb said …..Thompson does not strike me as “ambitous” enough politically to suddenly have the belly fire required to pull it off, however, if he’s paid enough to run, I guess he’ll go for it. The Bush family, on the other hand, is a political machine with a huge worldwide agenda. I just dunno…it sure will be interesting to watch this.

I have had enough of stubborn, pig-headed presidents. One thing which I really respect Edwards, among others for, is admitting they made a mistake in voting with Bush to invade Iraq. I don’t care much for a flip-flopper, but there is distinction between this, and changing one’s mind based on facts, evidence and principle.

Abraham Lincoln’s answer after changing his mind on a position; “I’d rather be right part of the time than wrong the whole time”.

Late to the party as usual these days, but FWIW I’m not a Hillary Clinton fan either. As I read somewhere upstairs she’s far too beholden to the same “big money” that is largely responsible for the mess(es) we’re in.

That said, if she does get the nomination I’ll vote for her. She’s light years better than anyone on the “double Gitmo” side of the aisle.

The nomination is Gore’s for the taking, similar to the way Thompson is shoving everyone else aside in the repug party. In fact, if Gore doesn’t run I’ll think a lot less of him because he knows how high the stakes are (global warming, U.S. standing in the world, SCOTUS appointments upcoming, etc.) and will have taken a pass when he could have made a difference when his country needed him.

It will be Gore/Thompson in 2008; Gore will be re-elected with at least 52% of the votes.

I feel so, so triangulated, after watching that clip. Anyone recommend a good soap with which to wash it off?

“It is the American military that has succeeded” . . . in raping, torturing and killing Iraqis. Again, damn those ungrateful Iraqis. This is all their fault. Sheesh.

Please realize that it is the a**hats in charge at the pentagon and the civilian leadership who created an environment that allowed those things to become as prevalent as they are.

In battle conditions, some problems have always occurred as an almost natural by-product. But when the leadership pretty much declares anything goes, it becomes what we are seeing today. And is probably a heavily contributing factor in the PTSD the troops are experieincing.

I am not excusing it, just trying to place it within a context that places the real blame where it most appropriately belongs.

Even at the end of his terms, Jeb was still relatively popular in florida but with the actions that his replacement has taken, I think a lot of Floridians do not look as kindly on Jeb as they once did.

And “Bush fatigue” means Jeb probably doesn’t make it. And I do believe he is smart enough to recognize this. At least not until ‘12 at the very earliest…

Jeb’s son is George Prescott Bush. He is the heir apparent in the continuation of the dreaded Bush Dynasty. Half Hispanic, G.P. is the grandson of George HW Bush whom often referred to the boy as the little brown one. He carries the old crooked great grandfather’s name Prescott, which entitles him to the moniker Pee Bush or something like that. Prescott loved to do business with the Nazi’s even when reprimanded by Congress.

I share the misgivings of most people here about Hillary. I am an Edwards supporter, and it makes me sad that others don’t see what I see in him.

But . . . if Hillary gets the nomination, there is a part of me that will be *thrilled*. A woman president! And such a smart, tough one! Wow!

Edwards is holding his own, despite the MSM and looks good in the latest polls. He may well win the Iowa primary. Yeah, I know, this is not the conventional wisdom but I believe he may well win the Iowa primary.

I have absolutely no problem discerning where fault lies for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. It’s not the American soldiers and not the Iraqi government who are to blame. When any presidential candidate attempts the scapegoat method with the Iraq catastrophe, that is fair game. One does not have to be particularly brilliant in assigning responsibility for the Iraq mess. This transparent attempt to escape blame is plain stupid.

That quote from above; I don’t remember the number. Looking at the ongoing catastrophe, I am wondering who out there saw the PBS ENDGAME last night? Or Sam Nunn with Charlie Rose? Both were predicting a very long run in Iraq. Recognizing the complete failure of planning or implementing or much of a team even on the same page. A completely tragic history with no good options…the only good one, sort of, to hang in there to attempt to stabilize what we have wrecked. Dear God. I felt sick guilt, horror at the scenes let alone the replays of an imbecile President claiming victory and all the wins for democracy. Anyway. What other reactions? Thanks

Can someone tell me more about Bloomberg? My mother, who still lives in NY, likes him…..and she ain’t easy to please.

Maybe I’m unfairly considering him guilty by association, but when I see Lieberman and Ed Koch clucking and crowing over the prospect of his entry, I assume he’s in it to throw the election to the Republicans and thereby save the war. It’s funny how all these “Unity” candidates are pro-war.

As a Floridian, let me chime in for a sec on Jeb! … (you have to write his name with the exclamation point. It’s state law. ;) )

There is no way he will be elected, and I don’t believe he’ll even be considered for the ticket. Not only is there Bush-fatigue, but we’re having to clean up unbelievable messes from his eight years as governor.

He destroyed our education system, set the environment back at least a quarter century, and basically reversed a long stretch of progress under predecessors like Lawton Chiles and Bob Graham. I can’t think of anything good to say about Jeb!, and while he cleans up nicer than his big brother, the fact is he’s just as batshit loony.

I share the misgivings of most people here about Hillary. I am an Edwards supporter, and it makes me sad that others don’t see what I see in him.

But . . . if Hillary gets the nomination, there is a part of me that will be *thrilled*. A woman president! And such a smart, tough one! Wow!

Edwards would be my second choice. I see plenty to like about him.

And, I also share your excitement about a woman president, but I’m afraid she couldn’t win the national election. As disjointed as the repugs are now, her campaign would be the one thing to galvanize them and the neanderthals that make up a significant part of their base.

Paul is a kind of Uncle Walter (Cronkite) to the people in the middle part of the country. I swear to God, people of all political persuasions in that part of the country stop what they’re doing to listen to his newscasts, whether they are Republican or Democrat, rich or poor. You might have co-workers in the same office – one who listens to Rush Limbaugh, and the other who listens to Ed Shultz and disagree on just about everything, but they will agree to listen to Paul Harvey

Anyway, a few months ago, when Paul went on vacation, his fill-in for that week – and since – has been Thompson. That may not seem like it means anything, until you remember the polls – after that week Fred shot up into – I think it was third place. And just this week – I think it was on Stephanie Miller – someone said that he’s in 1st place, 1 percentage point above Guliani now. And that may not mean anything, but when you think about when Shrub really started to tank about Iraq was when Paul Harvey began to question the strategy.

Can someone tell me more about Bloomberg? My mother, who still lives in NY, likes him…..and she ain’t easy to please.

Bloomberg is an odd duck. I live in NYC. I didn’t vote for him the 1st time, but did the 2nd time (I hate to admit that I *ever* pulled a lever for a R). The Dems were just lame. I couldn’t stand Mark Greene. Etc. And while I don’t “agree” with everything about Bloomberg–particularly his love of huge development projects–I like a lot about him. He is GREAT on environmental issues. Very liberal on social issues and very pro-gun control. Has fixed things with the cops and has done a lot to build racial bridges burned by Rudy. Got the city out of the debt Rudy left–by raising taxes! Pushed the no smoking ban through in the face of huge oppostion. Has done a lot to make city gov more responsive and accountable. The jury is still out on the schools–he has been trying, but what a friggin nightmare, and albany is no help.

VERY, very smart. And not really a repub. Was a Dem before he ran as mayor, and swtiched because he could avoid the nasty nasty nastiness of a Dem primary. So pragmatic is another appellation.

I was pissed at him for helping Lieberman. But then Lieberman turned around and stabbed him in the back on homeland sec $$. I have a feeling that this has a lot to do with his public pullout of the Republican party. On some level, I don’t buy that he will really run. I think he is too private and iconoclastic. Ane what would he do about his long time live in domestic partner?

Paul is a kind of Uncle Walter (Cronkite) to the people in the middle part of the country. I swear to God, people of all political persuasions in that part of the country stop what they’re doing to listen to his newscasts, whether they are Republican or Democrat, rich or poor. You might have co-workers in the same office – one who listens to Rush Limbaugh, and the other who listens to Ed Shultz and disagree on just about everything, but they will agree to listen to Paul Harvey

Anyway, a few months ago, when Paul went on vacation, his fill-in for that week – and since – has been Thompson. That may not seem like it means anything, until you remember the polls – after that week Fred shot up into – I think it was third place. And just this week – I think it was on Stephanie Miller – someone said that he’s in 1st place, 1 percentage point above Guliani now. And that may not mean anything, but when you think about when Shrub really started to tank about Iraq was when Paul Harvey began to question the strategy.

Paul is a kind of Uncle Walter (Cronkite) to the people in the middle part of the country. I swear to God, people of all political persuasions in that part of the country stop what they’re doing to listen to his newscasts, whether they are Republican or Democrat, rich or poor. You might have co-workers in the same office – one who listens to Rush Limbaugh, and the other who listens to Ed Shultz and disagree on just about everything, but they will agree to listen to Paul Harvey

Anyway, a few months ago, when Paul went on vacation, his fill-in for that week – and since – has been Thompson. That may not seem like it means anything, until you remember the polls – after that week Fred shot up into – I think it was third place. And just this week – I think it was on Stephanie Miller – someone said that he’s in 1st place, 1 percentage point above Guliani now. And that may not mean anything, but when you think about when Shrub really started to tank about Iraq was when Paul Harvey began to question the strategy.

Did your supervisor at the Justice Department tell you that he was looking to hire a Republican? Or maybe he altered your performance evaluation in order to punish you for not toeing the line? Or maybe he inexplicably eliminated a large number of job applicants because they’re Democrats?

Well, the House Judiciary Committee wants you to know that your complaint is safe with them. The committee has launched an effort to get into contact with Department employees who want to blow the whistle but are afraid they’ll pay for it.

“This Web site is designed to receive on a completely confidential basis any information concerning the possible politicization of the United States Department of Justice since 2001,” the page, called “Write Congress to Right Justice” and part of the committee’s website, reads.

I’m not a big fan of Hillary, but lately she’s been more like the old Hillary I remember from 1992. The intelligent, articulate woman that said to the nation on 60 minutes about her husband “if (our explanation of Clinton’s past infidelity) is not good enough for you, heck, don’t vote for him”. Much more real and straightforward. I believe it was Bill who told her to dumb herself down and be mediocre, in order to please the right wing (who still hates her and her hubby), and to be “centrist, bipartisan, and non-threatening”. I do hope she stops listening to Bill’s advice, because it may work for Bill, but it sure as shit doesn’t work for the Democrats or for Hillary.

oddmommy–I forgot to mention that he rides the subway to work everyday. And didn’t move into the Gov mansion (said he liked his own house better and it would be a waste of city $$) and doesn’t use the mayor’s office (works in a big open room with staffers). And really took NYC through a very dark time after 9-11. He also speaks to the public like they are smart enough to understand, particularly when explaining the budget.

Even at the end of his terms, Jeb was still relatively popular in florida but with the actions that his replacement has taken, I think a lot of Floridians do not look as kindly on Jeb as they once did.

And “Bush fatigue” means Jeb probably doesn’t make it. And I do believe he is smart enough to recognize this. At least not until ‘12 at the very earliest…

G-Dub didn’t jump Jeb in line. Jeb lost his first crack at the Florida Gov. mansion. GWB screwed things up by winning in Texas on his first try. Senior thought that Jeb was the political heir.

Probably in EPU-land again, but if you read this far, Jane, this commment is for you.

Digby’s coming out party was certainly the signature moment of the confrence so far for us gals (how wonderful that everyone can now know that the most trenchant and insightful voice in the blogosphere belongs to a woman), but it certainly wasn’t the only interesting one. Over the next few days I’ll be digesting and discussing much about the failure of female House candidates to win elections in 2007 and the role (or lack thereof) that the Democratic establishment/interest groups played in those races. There is a very big vacuum here that the blogosphere I think can effectively step into. We’ll also be focusing on the very exciting things that WVWV is doing to engage single women in the electoral process.

Recently, I suggested (in a comment at Glenn Greenwald’s blog) that we shouldn’t have to settle for the BigMedia or DNC or whomever focus group testing issues. Why can’t the left blogosphere sponsor its own focus groups on important questions, especially on issues like withdrawing from Iraq; Libby: to pardon or not; and the importance of rolling back Bush’s attacks against the constitution.

Jane, this is something you could do, all around the country. Ordinary people? More women than men? (especially single women?) Or a variety of all of these… and they should be video for youtube and FDL, etc.

Gotta remember that neither Daddy nor Jeb are “religious” enough for those types. GW is a Bush anomaly. The 28%’ers never trusted Daddy much. Unlike his big brother, Jeb doesn’t play stooopid, nor does he have a fake southern accent.

oddmommy–I forgot to mention that he rides the subway to work everyday. And didn’t move into the Gov mansion (said he liked his own house better and it would be a waste of city $$) and doesn’t use the mayor’s office (works in a big open room with staffers). And really took NYC through a very dark time after 9-11. He also speaks to the public like they are smart enough to understand, particularly when explaining the budget.

He seems to be his own man, which is rare in politics these days. Seems pragmatic as well.

He also scored a lot of points with me when he stuck it up the fear monger’s collective rears when he poo-pooed the JFK-Queens “terror” plot a few weeks ago.

I disagree with the mischaracterization of Senator Clinton’s position. Her vote to authorize Bush to use force against Iraq did not entail the irresponsible manner in which this war has been conducted. Senator Clinton did not:”…go into Iraq, pound it into the ground and destroy what scarce infrastructure it already had…” The Bush Administration is solely responsible for this misadventure. The Iraqi government has not taken any real initiative to reach agreement on a few things that would essentially bring the civil war to an end. These are facts. It is one thing for the far right to distort the truth of things, most of us are used to that. Now the far left is chiming in with it’s own distortion of the truth. I find it disgusting. People that strap explosives on their bodies or rig bombs in cars to blow up innocent people in the name of religion are not “victims.”

That rightwing noise machine is all part of the “create your own reality” Bushco/rnc crowd that was described by Suskind. Remember he told of that anonymous Bushco staffer who went onto say, they create their own reality, and then others (presumably most sane Americans, historians and even some in the 4th Estate), would then be left to study it,remark upon it, disemble and expose it for the falsehood that it really was… but by the time that happened the original reality creators had moved onto creating another reality repeating the cycle…It’s in their job description as Alternate universe creators.
Face it until we are ahead of them we are in trouble. These people don’t give a damn about accuracy, their reputations, or their credibility because no one holds them accountable. So I guess someone has to preempt them and try to write and predict what they will say or how they are going to spin it before it happens. Essentially the left needs to create the wingnut right reality before they create it.

Of course you do, Jane. You’ve been laying the ground to make an early call for her for some time now.

How could ANYONE underestimate HRC? She’s got more money and more backing from the fatcat wing of the party that’s been losing like the Chicago cubs, than any other candidate by far.

But it looks like she’s going to lose in buckle-on-the-corn-belt-Iowa, and that will take a little explaining. :o)

Also, the difference in stupidity-quotient of “which statement was she booed for”, is weighted heavily towards saying that “the Iraqi government is somehow to blame.”

It’s not only breathtakingly stupid; it’s also breathtakingly callous, Jane.

AND! It’s PRECISELY the little mantra that bush and the petro-borgs are beginning to chant:

…that somehow, despite the purple-fingered-ecstasy, the elected government of Iraq has flopped at making the shitmire that bush and the repubs, with Clinton’s help, come out to that apple-pie ending.

I will agree, that it is tempting TO underestimate her, in terms of intelligence, and in terms of human decency, when she climbs into bed with george bush ONE MORE TIME, to blame the Iraqis for what bush and the warbots have done there.

Sometime, down the road, she’s going to have to answer (just for starters) the question about whether or not it was a mistake to vote to enable, because until she does that, she can’t say that the war was, and is, a mistake.

Sen. Clinton has got some ferocious dues to pay, and with this republican shitspeak that she’s STILL prattling, the tab is getting bigger.

Never underestimate the determination of many, many, people in the progressive wing of the party, to make her pay them, before she can have our support.

Hillary Clinton is not a leader, first she refuses to take any responsibility for not only voting for this war but selling it to us. Now she wants to blame the Iraqis for this mess!
I would NOT vote for Hillary Clinton even if she were the only one running for POTUS.

Have you checked out the very recent Mrs. Thompson ? Could be a real deal braker with the red pant suit set . Scarborough wondered aloud if she worked ” a pole ” on MSNBC ( I did a morning coffee spit -take ) .

They’re probably doing a Stepford Makeover on her now , so this all could be moot . Just sayin’ …

I wish I could get my head around Hillary, but shes still pro-war and I really dont think our country needs any more dynasty

It is worth mentioning that she noted in her speech that she and Sen Byrd are sponsoring a bill to de-authorize the war, which means that Bush would not have the legal authority to wage it. That to me is a better option than simply cutting off funding. More honest.

Since July 25, 1990, when April Glaspie was instructed by Sec. of State James Baker to tell Saddam“We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America,” we have destroyed Iraq, killing close to 2 million of them, maining even more, and displacing what is now approaching 3 million of them. Iraqi women, once the best educated in the Middle East outside of Israel, are now demeaned beyond recognition. Clinton’s husband bears no small share of the guilt in this and in other continuing downward spirals in the Middle East.

Hillary Clinton is a heartless, cruel, sinister person to have said what she did yesterday, and I’m ashamed the booing was so sporadic and muffled. And I’m ashamed she’s being defended so assiduously here and elsewhere in the left blogosphere today.

I’ll pretty much echo Edward Teller above.

HRC is A*P*C funded, big pharm funded, big biz funded and WAR MACHINE PROPONENT (MIC) and in general, just one more of the privilaged elite who believe the wealth of the masses labor belongs to her and those LIKE her.

She will do NOTHING for the middle class, very LITTLE for middle class WOMEN, and she would perpetuate the BIGGEST PHALLIC MYTH of aging white ruling males of this country that we SHOULD rule the world and it’s wealth.

How ANY woman, working or not, could POSSIBLY think her gender means ANYTHING to their personal issues or causes or that she can or INTENDS to create a better world for the masses is completely beyond my ability to comprehend.

This forum is chock FULL of brilliant, brilliant women.

But given what THIS nation has done to its people, and the rest of the world, I’m completely at a loss to understand how women can even THINK of voting for HRC, even under the pretext that we are in dire straits and it’s HER or a Republican . . . .

And she’s unelectable . . . for all the reasons stated . . . she’s a carpetbagger and pillaged the White House and the COUNTRY will never forgive her for that . . . I personally don’t care WHAT she did in the WH as First Lady but I certainly care what she COULD do in the WH as the leader of our nation, like nuke Iran or any OTHER of the crazed and insane ideas the privilaged elitists dream of in their nocturnal scenes of global domination.

The USA is NOT meant to rule the world, it’s a white male and phallic concept being fulfilled thru concentration of wealth and power.

Our country needs to take stock of itself and DECIDE if it want’s to be a leader, or the Roman Bully who imploded upon itself . . . militaristic interventionism for control of oil is BAD. HRC is BAD, for anyone who wants peace and equitable chances for ALL people to have a quality of life with work, income, and housing and medical care for themselves and their family.

I don’t question Hillary’s capacity to govern, and I couldn’t care less about her gender. Everything else being equal, I’d prefer a lady president – that’d be a big slap to the male patriarchy. That’s right – some of us Southern, straight, middle-aged white guys don’t like a bunch of legacy, locker-room, towel-snappers running the country either!

I don’t care for her economic policies – she’s way too close to moneyed interests. I’m really hoping Edwards can draw to an inside straight in Iowa, NH and SC. That’s where my time and money is going.

But being a pragmatist, I have to accept the possibility Hillary prevails (don’t shoot me, OK kid!).

If so, how do we pull her to the progressive side of the ledger? Gonna take some stick with the carrot, IMV.

If we’re gonna have a woman president, I want it to be Nancy!!

Although Mz. Pelosi is ALSO A*P*C challenged, I would trust her to do more for the masses and peace than most of ANY candidates other than the stated Richardson, Kucinich and Edwards.

And Richardson frightens me for reasons others have stated before . . .

Gore continues to be backed by energy money and the nukes . . . and I don’t really KNOW where he stands with respect to our militant interventionism but I’d like to think he MIGHT have a proclivity to rebuild and retool America from within . . .

And, MY candidate of ANY party, is gonna hafta come out and draw a line in the sand between church and state, purge the Liverty College and Regent U placements in our federal agencies, and restore lost civil rights.

Anything less is unacceptable and just another frog in a pot of warming water.

We either get the country back, or give up that we’ve lost it long ago to profit and greed even the Ferenghi’s would be proud and dazzled by.

Thinly sliced bermuda, adorning thick and juicy summer slices of yellow, red and orange shaded heirloom tomatoes, dotted with capers, and a lemon thyme vinegarette with shavings of truffle and speckles of British Stilton Bleu (the perfect marriage of cow and bug).

A nice Merlot, CA of course, to accompany, and all sopped up with some rustic Italian Rosemary Artisan Bread pan seared with a spread of EVOO, garlic, buttah, basil and Black Wax Romano from Italy.

But then, it’s not the destination, it’s the journey, ain’t it . . . ‘what a long strange trip it’s been’ is an understatement these days . . . More Like A Broke Down Palace . . . ‘on my hands, and my knees, I will ro oooohh ohmm.’

I want the best Democratic president to begin running the government in 2009. Woman or man.

Huh, I’d like to see that leader being someone more interested in the common good of the greater masses . . at least the future generations would have a CHANCE at something . . . at this point, future generations are gonna be tied to their birth status . . . for life.

I’d like to throw out there, to keep things in balance, that some of the guys on stage with Digby were atrociously dressed. It was quite distracting. If you’re going to put on a suit coat it should sort of match the clothes you’re wearing.

(This meaningless moment is brought in a sense of showing it’s not always women who get criticized for appearance.)

Meaningless, humor perhaps, yet reflective of an ‘elitist’ perspective that shows NO consideration of those it’s directed at.

Gilly, for instance, didn’t have a phreakin dime for healthcare and prolly not much money for clothes.

I’d bet, LOTS of hard core and RIGHTOUS bloggers are not of a monetary class to HAVE such luxury’s as FINE CLOTHING.

And that’s NOT a gender issue, by ANY phreakin means, it speaks to ALL.

Okay, I have ambivalent feelings about some issues regarding Hillary but I have to say that I had misgivings about Bill. So, I am willing to give her a chance. Here’s what I would like to see as a test flight for the big election. Let’s give her feedback. Write her, let her know what you like and what you don’t. Let’s see how responsive her campaign is. Instead of bashing, (I am speaking to women since we sometimes have a little problem with supporting each other in leadership positions), let’s try communicating with her about what we would want her to do to get our votes. Let’s get behind her and ask for what we want and see how she responds?

Well, that’s what I am going to do. I have to say that the idea of a female president so that I can tell my daughter, “yes, you can be president..” and not say it with a slight twinge of doubt, is a refreshing thought. I think that if she keeps looking like the front runner, I need to start taking my concerns to her privately and to move toward a more supportive position. This may be a once in a lifetime chance for me to support a woman. I hope not, but I think with Bill as the side kick it’s the best chance we have.

I have been overwhelmed with the amount of sexism coming from commentators on every channel and even including my beloved Olbermann.

Women, we may need to stand together on this one. And no, don’t look the other way, ask her for what you want.

It’s NOT sexism!! Stop using the gender card!!! She’s one of THEM!!!! SHE’S A CONSOLIDATOR OF WEALTH OUT OF YOUR HANDS INTO HER OWN!!!

. . . . I don’t want my daughters growing up an oligarchy. The US Constitution is one of the greatest documents ever, and I want those ideals to rule our country in the future. I fear a future where Conglomerates have even more control than they currently do. I fear Hillary will not only allow this, she will encourage mega-corporate rule.

Hope I’m wrong.

WELL PUT!!

Hoss, you ain’t bonkers, I’m here to tell you that. Way to represent. Ahem, amen!

I want us out, now. I want those who fabricated the war and the intelligence leading up to the war in the first place to be held fully accountable, removed from power, and prosecuted to the full extent of the war.

This is also part of the blurring strategy. As long as she can make it difficult to separate out the different candidate’s views on Iraq, she can retain her front running status. For any of the other candidates to have a chance, they have to differentiate themselves from her. Edwards is trying, but it doesn’t seem to be gaining traction. Obama seems incapable of this.

Dodd keeps saying the right things. I wish he’d get more penetration because it would force some of these issues to be debated.

Here’s some Edwards traction. New Gallup matchup poll: all three Dem front-runners beat all three GOP front-runners, but John beats them all best. He particularly — and strikingly — does best against Romney.

The national polling within parties reflects name recognition and is meaningless since there’s no national primary. Within our party, the five states that matter are Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and perhaps Florida. These (currently) precede Terrible Tuesday, the national primary on 2/5/08.

And once again (goin out on a limb here) like the good old daze, CA will drive the bus!!!!

God I hope this state and my fellow inhabitants do the right thing now and then on that date, and vote PROGRESSIVE and for the masses . . . but, I fear a capitulation to lemming led ideals and images crafted from the bowels of MONEY, and of course, the movies.

Elizabeth Edwards, Jane Hamsher, Christy, Nancy Pelosi: these are beloved women, women that could be elected to anything. Hillary is not one of you. She reminds too many workingclass people of their snobby boss. Her husband reminds average Americans of his own likelihood of misbehavior. They are just not sellable anymore. They are selfish to want any more, Obama is selfish to want so much so soon. If only we can get Edwards the nomination, he’s the only one of them who will actually get enough votes to win.

as a gyno-challenged American (aka, a man) I am deeply offended by the charade that Digby has perpetrated… men are not “things” to be secretly imitated… why did the Boston Tea Party participants pass themselves off as Indians? because if there were any witnesses Indians would take the blame… who does someone blame when they get mad at Digby? MEN!

LOL

I don’t think she ever intentionally presented herself as a man, did she?

Some people might take me to be a man just because my handle is Mandrake (from Dr. Strangelove – Cptn Lionel Mandrake). I just loved the name because I love the movie and I identified with the character (running around trying to prevent the destruction of the world). But I’m not trying to fool anyone that I’m a man.

just because you’re an RAF exchange officer don’t give you no special pre-rogatives… anyway, I was certainly joking!

I’m not a big fan of Hillary, but lately she’s been more like the old Hillary I remember from 1992.

[Mod: snip]

It’s a different world from the carefree 90’s and the issues are more stark. Hillary will be the now President, with the social issues in the forefront. And she’ll return to the diplomatic school of stopping and preventing preemptive war.
My other thought is serious. Many of you would vote for Hillary, but say “but she can’t win”. She WILL win if YOU vote for her. It’s the agregate of all votes….one vote at a time that a winner makes.

Those who want to maintain that Hillary is cold and doesn’t connect with an audience clearly haven’t heard her speak recently because she was anything but. She was actually very winning and warm and people really liked her.

I guess different people hear what they want to hear. I still hear the grating drone of talking points. And you do realize the candidates pack these things with their supporters to act as shills, right?

bloomberg is the new nader. he’ll siphon votes away from democrats to indulge his self-aggrandization. as we all know from history, that story doesn’t end well.

he’s also the asshole who pre-emptively arrested peaceful protesters during the Republican National Convention (aka, dancing on the graves of September 11) to preserve the flawless media presentation of the George W. Bush coronation. having lived under that particular period of martial law, i would not want to see him as commander in chief.

Bloomberg is best known for his patronizing “my way or the highway” style of governing. he’s smarter than Rudy, and way more successful, but the temperment is the same – an autocrat. so you can just shut up already with the democracy stuff – he’ll let you know how things are going to be done.